Edwin Bell Co. v. Rogers

138 A. 903, 33 Del. 445, 3 W.W. Harr. 445, 1927 Del. LEXIS 29
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedJuly 18, 1927
DocketNo. 1
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 138 A. 903 (Edwin Bell Co. v. Rogers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Edwin Bell Co. v. Rogers, 138 A. 903, 33 Del. 445, 3 W.W. Harr. 445, 1927 Del. LEXIS 29 (Del. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

Richards, J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

The Industrial Accident Board derives its authority to hear and determine claims for compensation between employers and employees, from “the Delaware Workmen’s Compensation Law of 1917.”

Appeals from the decisions of said Board are provided [447]*447for by said law as amended by chapter 203, § 5 (amending 3193r, §111) of volume 30 of the Laws of Delaware, which provides as follows:

“An award of said Board in the absence of fraud shall be final and conclusive between the parties, except as provided in 3193p, section 109, unless, within ten days after a copy thereof has been sent to the parties, either party appeals to the Superior Court for the County in which the injury occurred.”

It clearly appears from this provision of the law that no one except parties to the hearing before the Board can appeal to this Court.

The claim in question was filed by Daniel E. Rogers against the Edwin Bell Company and/or Charles H. Rogers, the American Mutual Liability Insurance Company of Boston not being a party to the proceeding. Said insurance company was represented at the hearing by counsel, and was interested in the result of the proceeding, but that did not operate to make it a party to the proceeding as originally brought before the Board.

The Court is, therefore, of the opinion that the insurance company had not the right to take the appeal from the decision of the Board, and the same is hereby dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Frank C. Sparks Co. v. Huber Baking Co.
96 A.2d 456 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1953)
Distefano v. Lamborn
46 Del. 406 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 A. 903, 33 Del. 445, 3 W.W. Harr. 445, 1927 Del. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edwin-bell-co-v-rogers-delsuperct-1927.